Removing Confederate Monuments and Renaming Confederate-Named Military Bases

[DBT]

The problem is that often mob mentality leaps beyond issues of slavery or 'black lives matter' and becomes unreasonable. like when reasonable protest turns into mob violence and looting.

Churchill, for instance, is honoured for his role in the war, yet was targeted. In Australia, James Cook, former Prime minister's of Australia because of their policies, etc.

So the mob mind, beginning with reason, becomes both irrational and unreasonable, tearing down or defacing whatever does not conform to an ideology.

It's worth considering whether it was the mob mentality that erected theses statues in the first place.

It could have been. It may have been inappropriate or just plain wrong. That doesn't mean the mob is always right or doing what is appropriate.

 

[Rhea]

The problem is that often mob mentality leaps beyond issues of slavery or 'black lives matter' and becomes unreasonable. like when reasonable protest turns into mob violence and looting.

Churchill, for instance, is honoured for his role in the war, yet was targeted. In Australia, James Cook, former Prime minister's of Australia because of their policies, etc.

So the mob mind, beginning with reason, becomes both irrational and unreasonable, tearing down or defacing whatever does not conform to an ideology.

It's worth considering whether it was the mob mentality that erected theses statues in the first place.

It could have been. It may have been inappropriate or just plain wrong. That doesn't mean the mob is always right or doing what is appropriate.

I think we have conclusive evidence that the “mob” is not the reason these statues should come down. The reasons have been stated and are pretty unequivocal, and do not depend on a mob to pursuade.

What’s the fight against agreeing that statues of traitorous slaveholders have no place in the town squares?

Is “well we might be overreacting about statues of traitorous slavery advocates due to mob influence” the ONLY argument for keeping them?
While the arguments against are clearcut and easily supported?

 

[Keith&Co.]

It's not just monuments, either. I grew up in the South, and lived off of Lee-Jackson Memorial Highway. Named after two Confederate generals.

I grew up in Idaho. In one part of town, the streets are named after US Presidents, in alphabetical order. Moving out from the main road are Adams, Buchanan, Cleveland...

Davis....

Eisenhower, Filmore....

I always thought 'Davis' was kind of cheating. Certainly for Idaho. Then, no one wanted to hear it unless i had a better suggestion. But now i see that the town expanded in that direction. In order, they have Johnson, Kennedy, Lyndon.. Jeez. Make the fourth street DWIGHT, then.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Kinda on topic - that Lincoln statue in Boston where the freed slave is kneeling in front of him is getting attention. I agree, it's not appropriate today, never was. Get it out of the public square.

 

[DBT]

It could have been. It may have been inappropriate or just plain wrong. That doesn't mean the mob is always right or doing what is appropriate.

I think we have conclusive evidence that the “mob” is not the reason these statues should come down. The reasons have been stated and are pretty unequivocal, and do not depend on a mob to pursuade.

What’s the fight against agreeing that statues of traitorous slaveholders have no place in the town squares?

Is “well we might be overreacting about statues of traitorous slavery advocates due to mob influence” the ONLY argument for keeping them?
While the arguments against are clearcut and easily supported?

The mob is not the reason why some statues should come down, be scrapped or relocated to a museum. But the mob does not appear to base all of their decisions on reason, at times only knee jerk emotion, yet have taken it upon themselves to destroy or deface monuments according to emotion. Sometimes they may be correct in their selection, other times being a mob, not so much.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It could have been. It may have been inappropriate or just plain wrong. That doesn't mean the mob is always right or doing what is appropriate.

I think we have conclusive evidence that the “mob” is not the reason these statues should come down. The reasons have been stated and are pretty unequivocal, and do not depend on a mob to pursuade.

What’s the fight against agreeing that statues of traitorous slaveholders have no place in the town squares?

Is “well we might be overreacting about statues of traitorous slavery advocates due to mob influence” the ONLY argument for keeping them?
While the arguments against are clearcut and easily supported?

The mob is not the reason why some statues should come down, be scrapped or relocated to a museum. But the mob does not appear to base all of their decisions on reason, at times only knee jerk emotion, yet have taken it upon themselves to destroy or deface monuments according to emotion. Sometimes they may be correct in their selection, other times being a mob, not so much.

But these statues should come down because they advocate and glorify slavery, mob or no mob. White supremacism put them there so they should be removed from the public square and should not be funded by public dollars anymore.

 

[laughing dog]

It could have been. It may have been inappropriate or just plain wrong. That doesn't mean the mob is always right or doing what is appropriate.

I think we have conclusive evidence that the “mob” is not the reason these statues should come down. The reasons have been stated and are pretty unequivocal, and do not depend on a mob to pursuade.

What’s the fight against agreeing that statues of traitorous slaveholders have no place in the town squares?

Is “well we might be overreacting about statues of traitorous slavery advocates due to mob influence” the ONLY argument for keeping them?
While the arguments against are clearcut and easily supported?

The mob is not the reason why some statues should come down, be scrapped or relocated to a museum. But the mob does not appear to base all of their decisions on reason, at times only knee jerk emotion, yet have taken it upon themselves to destroy or deface monuments according to emotion. Sometimes they may be correct in their selection, other times being a mob, not so much.

You write as if "the mob" is the same everywhere - which is ridiculous. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down Confederate statutes have good reasons. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down the Christopher Columbus statues have good reasons. In each case, those reasons have been around and promoted for years but have been ignored.

Frankly, those "mobs" are making more sense than your arguments.

 

[Worldtraveller]

This is such a great point. Here's the deal, many of these statutes were strategically placed in areas purposely intended to mock the local people there. Getting rid of these statues dosn't change history! The thought of this is absolutely crazy.

But it's gotten to the point where mobs are targeting statues like Churchill, Columbus, etc....where does it stop when fault can be found in every man?

Are you really this ok siding with the white supremacists?

 

[repoman]

What was the general public and scholarly opinion (not top end historians) about Columbus at the time when those statues were erected?

Were KKK present in full garb when these Columbus statues were unveiled?

In 1492 the time was fast approaching for any European navigator to discover the already inhabited New World. So that takes some of the specialness away from Columbus.

I do think that even if Columbus was as kind and fair of a man his time and position of representative of the power of Spain could be that his statues would eventually be torn down.

The error bars on his level of cruelty are huge because of motivated scholarship in the 1500s and 1800s and 1900s. But it is all academic at this point.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

This is such a great point. Here's the deal, many of these statutes were strategically placed in areas purposely intended to mock the local people there. Getting rid of these statues dosn't change history! The thought of this is absolutely crazy.

But it's gotten to the point where mobs are targeting statues like Churchill, Columbus, etc....where does it stop when fault can be found in every man?

Are you really this ok siding with the white supremacists?

No one is perfect, that is true, there is no such thing as perfection. But on balance we know what is right and what should happen to these statues. Maybe Trumpo wants to put them at his Florida estate. Let him have them so all the right wingers can go have their orgasms, he can even charge admission. Just get the things out of the public squares where it sends the wrong message about the kind of society that we are.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This is such a great point. Here's the deal, many of these statutes were strategically placed in areas purposely intended to mock the local people there. Getting rid of these statues dosn't change history! The thought of this is absolutely crazy.

But it's gotten to the point where mobs are targeting statues like Churchill, Columbus, etc....where does it stop when fault can be found in every man?

Columbus was an idiot. He thought he found India because he knew that the Earth was shaped differently than common convention at the time thought it was (he was wrong). There should be no statues for a guy that wasn't even the first European to step foot on North American soil.

 

[DBT]

This is such a great point. Here's the deal, many of these statutes were strategically placed in areas purposely intended to mock the local people there. Getting rid of these statues dosn't change history! The thought of this is absolutely crazy.

But it's gotten to the point where mobs are targeting statues like Churchill, Columbus, etc....where does it stop when fault can be found in every man?

Are you really this ok siding with the white supremacists?

You midunderstand. I am siding with reason over emotion, due process over mob hysteria..... your post is an appeal to emotion.

 

[DBT]

The mob is not the reason why some statues should come down, be scrapped or relocated to a museum. But the mob does not appear to base all of their decisions on reason, at times only knee jerk emotion, yet have taken it upon themselves to destroy or deface monuments according to emotion. Sometimes they may be correct in their selection, other times being a mob, not so much.

You write as if "the mob" is the same everywhere - which is ridiculous. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down Confederate statutes have good reasons. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down the Christopher Columbus statues have good reasons. In each case, those reasons have been around and promoted for years but have been ignored.

Frankly, those "mobs" are making more sense than your arguments.

My argument is that the mob is not the best arbiter of truth, that a mob can get out of control,turning reasonable protest into rioting and looting for its own sake, the evidence for that can be seen in re accent events.

Based on your remarks, you clearly don't understand what I am saying.

You see what you want to see regardless of what I say.

 

[laughing dog]

The mob is not the reason why some statues should come down, be scrapped or relocated to a museum. But the mob does not appear to base all of their decisions on reason, at times only knee jerk emotion, yet have taken it upon themselves to destroy or deface monuments according to emotion. Sometimes they may be correct in their selection, other times being a mob, not so much.

You write as if "the mob" is the same everywhere - which is ridiculous. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down Confederate statutes have good reasons. The "mob" in each locality that wants to take down the Christopher Columbus statues have good reasons. In each case, those reasons have been around and promoted for years but have been ignored.

Frankly, those "mobs" are making more sense than your arguments.

My argument is that the mob is not the best arbiter of truth, that a mob can get out of control turning from reasonable protest into rioting and looting for its own sake, the evidence for that is there to be seen. Based on your remarks, you clearly don't understand what I am saying. Going on my past interactions with you, no matter what I say, you see something entirely different. You see what you want to see.

That is pure meta-irony. The problem is that I and everyone else understand the content of your posts.

Statutes are not representative of history. Confederate statutes were placed at the urging of racists to remind white people of the "good old days" and blacks about their proper place. It was a form of terrorism. Despite your mewlings, there is nothing sancrosanct about the placement of statutes in public places.

The fact that a "mob" can get out of control does not mean that their initial reasons are irrational. At some point, when institutions and leaders refuse to listen to their constituents, things like this happen.

What should concern most people is the intransigence of those in charge who refused to allow some change, not the fate of some dumbass statutes.

Despite your hints, no one here is advocating mob rule. "Mob rule" can be a force for good. This time it was.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Mobs lynch people and kill people. That's not happening, unless we consider the police to be exhibiting mob behavior.

And statues could care less. If every statue expressing this pro-slavery sentiment gets ripped down and tossed into the ocean it will be a better day tomorrow.

 

[DBT]

My argument is that the mob is not the best arbiter of truth, that a mob can get out of control turning from reasonable protest into rioting and looting for its own sake, the evidence for that is there to be seen. Based on your remarks, you clearly don't understand what I am saying. Going on my past interactions with you, no matter what I say, you see something entirely different. You see what you want to see.

That is pure meta-irony. The problem is that I and everyone else understand the content of your posts.

Oh, I see, you have been in contact with all the readers and they have appointed you to speak on their behalf?

Statutes are not representative of history.

That's exactly why statues are erected; to represent historical figures, to represent history. That some are inappropriate is an issue...as is how to go about determining which is or is not appropriate and what should be done with those that are not. The mob was not all that careful in their selection process.

Confederate statutes were placed at the urging of racists to remind white people of the "good old days" and blacks about their proper place. It was a form of terrorism. Despite your mewlings, there is nothing sancrosanct about the placement of statutes in public places.

Which has nothing to do with what I said. And shows that despite being the spokesperson of all readers, you don't understand the distinction I made.

The fact that a "mob" can get out of control does not mean that their initial reasons are irrational. At some point, when institutions and leaders refuse to listen to their constituents, things like this happen.

My point was not about the initial good intentions of the protest, but the fact that a large gathering of people can and do turn into a mob and behave irrationally, showing little or no discernment over what should be removed or preserved.

 

[DBT]

Mobs lynch people and kill people. That's not happening, unless we consider the police to be exhibiting mob behavior.

And statues could care less. If every statue expressing this pro-slavery sentiment gets ripped down and tossed into the ocean it will be a better day tomorrow.

Both the police and the protestors have turned to violence;

''As of Monday, June 8, an informal tally shows 17 people have died in incidents stemming from the unrest following Floyd’s May 25 death — though details in some of the cases remain murky.

Floyd died after a Minneapolis officer knelt on his neck for more than eight minutes, ignoring his pleas that he couldn’t breathe.

Many of the people killed were black, compounding the tragedy for black communities.''

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Mobs lynch people and kill people. That's not happening, unless we consider the police to be exhibiting mob behavior.

And statues could care less. If every statue expressing this pro-slavery sentiment gets ripped down and tossed into the ocean it will be a better day tomorrow.

Both the police and the protestors have turned to violence;

''As of Monday, June 8, an informal tally shows 17 people have died in incidents stemming from the unrest following Floyd’s May 25 death — though details in some of the cases remain murky.

Floyd died after a Minneapolis officer knelt on his neck for more than eight minutes, ignoring his pleas that he couldn’t breathe.

Many of the people killed were black, compounding the tragedy for black communities.''

Then blame the police for inciting mob behavior. That is certainly what happened.

 

[DBT]

Mobs lynch people and kill people. That's not happening, unless we consider the police to be exhibiting mob behavior.

And statues could care less. If every statue expressing this pro-slavery sentiment gets ripped down and tossed into the ocean it will be a better day tomorrow.

Both the police and the protestors have turned to violence;

''As of Monday, June 8, an informal tally shows 17 people have died in incidents stemming from the unrest following Floyd’s May 25 death — though details in some of the cases remain murky.

Floyd died after a Minneapolis officer knelt on his neck for more than eight minutes, ignoring his pleas that he couldn’t breathe.

Many of the people killed were black, compounding the tragedy for black communities.''

Then blame the police for inciting mob behavior. That is certainly what happened.

There have been peaceful protests. There have been protests where police appear to have incited violence and there have been protests where the protestors have gone on rampage, apparenty looting and causing destruction for its own sake.

 

[Arctish]

Statutes are not representative of history.

That's exactly why statues are erected; to represent historical figures, to represent history. That some are inappropriate is an issue...as is how to go about determining which is or is not appropriate and what should be done with those that are not. The mob was not all that careful in their selection process.

I see your point. Mobs are thoughtless and destructive. There's good reason to be alarmed about the destruction. But as long as protesters feel their calls for change are being ignored or thwarted, there will be protests around symbols of oppression like those statues. Anyway, deciding which statues to keep in place and which to move to other settings is going to be pretty easy compared to deciding what to do about Stone Mountain.

I think most people here felt some degree of disapproval when the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamyan . Would blasting the Civil War generals off Stone Mountain be as bad? Perhaps the Stone Mountain carving being so recent makes its loss less of an issue. Or, perhaps it should be left in place to eventually become a treasured part of world heritage, like the carvings of Pharoahs in Egypt.

Personally, I'd rather they were removed. The scar on that mountain will be there for thousands of years, and that's an even better symbol of slavery and white supremacy than 3 guys on horses.